Pluralismo, inclusión y abandonos

The role of brand management in broadcasting

Brand management has started to play an important role in broadcasting today. Channels and programme brands are being looked upon not only from a brand image and style perspective, but also in a strategic view to create a distinct ‘brand identity’ which can provide competitive advantages. A brand in television today provides a panacea against the morass of undifferentiated programming and increasingly penetrating multi-channel expansion. The brand represents the channel and programme positioning by establishing a distinctiveness epitomized by a viewer’s emotional experience.

Broadcasting brands are now being equated to retail brands, where programmes can be considered a product or line of a channel. However, comprehensive branding initiatives adopted by the frontrunner of the UK’s TV industry, the BBC, are yet to be filtered down and replicated.

Moreover, broadcasters like to refer to the importance of the channel brand as it provides undifferentiated programming the opportunity to be consumed by the audience. They link it directly to the value of the shop front in retail branding, and referring it to the channel’s brand image (or visual styling) as a reason for viewers to walk into the shop front or the channel. But this argument largely fails in the case of branded programmes.

The rise of the programme brand

Programme brands can be seen as rising in prominence steadily as a majority of industry professionals feel that most viewers want to watch a programme and not because it is broadcast on a particular channel. Hence if a programme brand moves from one channel to another, viewers are likely to shift their channel loyalties as well.

The rise in programme brands can be attributed largely to digital technology as viewers, or their digital programme selectors, can now plough through programme and genre criteria to select a specific programme to watch; thereby effectively bypassing the channel and its schedule. This, however, does not happen in the case of live or event-based programming where both the programme as well as the channel brand is affected by other concerns of digital technology, as discussed further.

It may be remembered that in today’s TV scenario, given an opportunity, audiences increasingly like to interact rather than remain passive viewers. And they are more likely to interact with trusted programme brands, rather than unbranded programmes and promotions. Here again, technology helps the producers to pack in features to a programme to make it interactive, thereby changing the nature of programming as well.

Programmes are not only being seen and exploited as brands but their extensions are being created more often, particularly in the case of children’s and event-based programming.

Traditional extensions such as magazines and books are losing ground because of the saturation in the print market and so brand extensions must be sought across media platforms such as spin-off programming, internet, mobile telephony, retailing, events and consumer goods; all developments accentuated by advances in digital technology. Here, it strongly appears that the channel brand fails to be an effective endorser of a programme brand extension initiative.

Currently, however, programme brand extensions are only borne out of their financial potential.

There is no evidence of an industry wide comprehensive brand strategy which producers or broadcasters are putting in place to create programme brand extensions. Broadcasters also have to keep in mind that brand extensions may be tried only if there is a fit to the original values of the programme, thereby retaining the trust and interest with the viewer established by the programme.

Advertiser funded programmes, another type of branded programming, seem to be on the increase as well, though a part of the industry is wary of experimenting with them, attributing a lack of awareness on the part of the advertisers (who may feel safe with spot advertising) or a fear of backlash from audiences (who may feel undue prominence being given to an advertiser).

However, the industry is coming to terms with the fact that presence of a commercial brand in close proximity to a programme helps drive synergies for the programme brand. Advertiser

they increase their editorial content and integrate it with their self-promotions. Ultimately, the future will see more secondary brand associations (i.e. AFPs and AFCs) in the broadcasting industry in the UK.

Regulation is another factor which has contributed to the growth of programme brands. It gives the original producers more ownership of programme rights, thereby rendering the broadcasters as just one of the buyers to whom producers may sell their goods, namely programme brands.

This, coupled with the awareness of following a brand strategy for programmes, has substantially increased the original producer’s powers. This unsettles the broadcasters who argue that the increasing power of the producers will make it difficult for them to inject investment to develop and market innovative programmes. Producers recognize that the broadcaster supports the development as well as the marketing of most of the generic undifferentiated programming besides the branded programmes; particularly in the case of commissioned programmes where the broadcaster shapes much of the producer’s idea and secures for itself a strong position in the relationship. Overall, the increase in power means better programming as the producers will also keep an eye out for the saleable aspects of a programme.

Building the channel brand in context of programme brands

On the interaction between programme and channel brands, it is easier for niche channels with a specific genre remit to create channel brands; the same is difficult for a channel with a broader remit. The broad remit channels seem to have a higher reliance on programme brands (or sometimes the star value of its principal actors). Some channels position themselves on the type of programming and sometimes programming is based on the existing position and perception of the channel brand – both being inextricably linked to each other.

From a channel’s perspective, digital technologies seem to be undermining its brand, especially when a retailer or a programme re-packager comes between the broadcaster and its intended audience. However, technology can also be utilized to brand the broadcaster’s channels as well.

Digital technologies also offer sophisticated on-screen graphics and electronic programme guides which will be used to help reinforce and build the channel brand. Interactive features will be used to complement live and event based programming to build the channel’s brand and in many cases to open extra revenue streams. It is also clear that, because of digital technologies, many more channels exist today, however the future will see amalgamation of these numerous channel

brands under strong corporate brands in order to drive synergies by cross promoting and tying audiences down between the family channels.

An interesting relationship between the channel brand and the news programme brand has been identified, where the news is usually an indicator of the position which the channel wishes to obtain in a viewer’s mind. In other words, the news becomes the most visual branding statement of the channel.

In a business to business scenario, channel brands provide a safety net when commissioning overseas programmes and allow channels and networks to deliver specific style of programming, thereby reducing dissonance between expected and delivered content. Bigger channel brands usually are able to aggregate rights and make a profit, something which independent producers may not be able to manage and sustain because of low margins in international rights sales.

Channel brands provide the development support and infrastructure to programmes before these become brands; hence channels are not being obviated by programme brands. Both are poised to co-exist and add to each others’ strengths.

The future of programme and channel brand building.

Finally, today’s TV marketers wish to get involved with the programme at the conception stage to evaluate its fit to the overall channel brand, position it appropriately in the target market and apply sophisticated marketing tools. This increases the prospect of a well planned brand management and extension strategy, something which the programme makers don’t want as it seems to compromise their creative position. Suspicions between programme makers (i.e. the producers and commissioners) and the marketers (i.e. the sales and business development department of the broadcasters) remain, mainly due to the perceived exclusivity between various programme functions such as production, commissioning and marketing. These need to be addressed by emphasizing to all concerned the importance of overall marketing – not just selling. Slowly, the exclusivity of programme functions is breaking down because of changes in digital technology, as some broadcasters are putting in place cross-functional teams which consider programmes as brands during conception itself, without compromising the creative and innovative aspects of the programme.